This is Behind the Blog, where we share our behind-the-scenes thoughts about how a few of our top stories of the week came together. This week, we discuss the right to view porn without being hassled about "brain impairment" in Texas, lurking in hacking groups, and "dumb" FOIAs.
SAM: This week I wrote about a new development in an ongoing battle for the right to watch porn that’s happening across the U.S. This law in particular has been a whiplash-inducing mess: in August, industry advocates (including Pornhub, which historically hasn’t gotten in the political mud directly like this) sued the state to stop the law from being enacted, and on August 31, right before it was set to go into effect, a district judge agreed and issued an injunction. Last month, the state asked a Fifth Circuit panel to lift the injunction. The disclaimer is part of a broader age verification requirement, and while you can just click “continue” to close it for now without uploading your ID or anything (unlike in several other states where similar laws have passed and that’s a requirement, now), it is absolutely wild, and reads like a screed from an incel forum. “Harm human brain development,” what? “Desensitizes brain reward circuits?” Porn is “associated with low self-esteem and body image, eating disorders???” As if seeing too many Abercrombie ads when I was 13 didn’t do that already. I’m especially curious to know how Texas legislators proved that porn “weakens brain function,” for example, other than firsthand experience.
404 Media subscriber Daniel Shook commented on the story: “My fear is that these programs will push people from sites with established offices and known practices that do follow the law to more potentially exploitative sites that don’t require verification. Not that the people behind these laws actually care.”